Russian Invasion of Ukraine

  • Thread starter Rage Racer
  • 10,146 comments
  • 612,098 views
I'll try to explain. For some time there have been a law in Ukraine that allowed certain regions to have other languages than Ukrainian as their official language. Recently, the newly "adjusted" parliament voted for that law to be repelled, making quite a few people unhappy. After that, acting president Turchinov vetoed that decision.
Right. I assume the logic behind that law was to make life easier for people who speak those other languages. Russian and Ukrainian are different enough that they are recognised as individual languages. Recognising those other languages as official languages would enable them to be used in a formal capacity. For example, if a school was predominantly made up of ethnic Russians, then that law would allow those schools to teach classes in Russian. I know first-hand the challenges of teaching across a language barrier - I have taught in schools with sixty-nine different languages among the students.

I am guessing that the fact the interim government was willing to consider repealing that law at all would have been extremely unpopular - it would have been perceived as the interim government abandoning the Russian population. Even if Turchinov vetoed the vote, the interim government has existed for little more than a week. Repealing the law was one of the first things they did. It would not inspire a lot of confidence in the Russian-speaking population.

And while they obviously want to wash away the stink of corruption from Yanukovych's reign, repealing a law that improved the quality of life for some without impacting the quality of life for others seems like a strange way to do that. It's like the assumed everything Yanukovych did was wrong simply because he did it.
 
I should say that: the first victim in any war is the truth.
And now, the truth is already dead in Russia.

You would think that the Russian government would realize that censorship needs to cover internet as well to make it work...
The internet censorship is already on. Some web sites and VK communities about the Ukrainian revolution are now locked to RF residents to prevent them from knowing the truth. Fortunately, some browser plugins can get you through the lock.
We'll probably soon have something like the Great Chinese Firewall in the Runet.
 
Last edited:
I should say that: the first victim in any war is the truth.
Understanding must come a close second, then. Our Prime Minister characterised the situation in the Ukraine as Russia taking advantage of a country in turmoil to seize more land for itself and threatening the use of force to take more.

And he wonders why journalists won't take his word for it when he says he is doing a great job on domestic issues ...
 
I wonder if Obama will intervene.
Diplomatically, probably.

Militarily, almost certainly not. They may not be the superpower they once were, but they are still more than capable of defending themselves. Drawing Russia into a direct confrontation would be the biggest armed conflict since at least the Vietnam War, and probably the Second World War.
 
Russia still has everything from the Cold war except their nuclear weapons. As far as I know, the agreement that RF/USA reached after the end of the Cold War, was that they would both destroy all nuclear weapons... I'm not sure if they even bothered with destroying their small-arms weapons. It would likely be too costly.


As far as I'm concerned, RF still has everything they had in Cold War and maybe a bit more. They should still be seen as a big threat, in my opinion.
 
Russia still has everything from the Cold war except their nuclear weapons. As far as I know, the agreement that RF/USA reached after the end of the Cold War, was that they would both destroy all nuclear weapons... I'm not sure if they even bothered with destroying their small-arms weapons. It would likely be too costly.
The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (START) called for some reduction in weapons, including the complete destruction of their notorious SS-18 'Satan' and Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) arsenal, but they do have a nuclear stockpile of their own.
 
So, things are even worse now than I thought?!
*nuclear facepalm*

The situation is nowhere near a nuclear exchange. It would take a serious escalation in things before anyone considered pressing the nuclear button. The fact that you even think it is a possibility demonstrates how little awareness of the situation you actually have.
 
No, I don't even like the possibility. The thought is scary. Even if it were a one-in-a-billion chance, that's 0.0000000001% too close. :scared:
 
You cannot put a percentage on it. Calm yourself down. Right now, you are doing more damage than the Russians are by entertaining the idea at all.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Go and educate yourself on the subject first. Ask yourself: why is Russia doing this?
 
...Because they've got egg on their face, having just lost a political ally to the EU, and they're trying to minimize the damage.


And, I don't care how unlikely it is, any chance at all is too much. It happened twice, in Japan. Atomic/nuclear bombs just aren't right. I'm more saying that I'm shocked to find out that the WMDs still exist (outside of North Korean fireworks), rather than I'm saying that it's likely anything will happen.


I understand that I probably seem naïve, but :eek: the idea that they still exist scares me.
 
...Because they've got egg on their face, having just lost a political ally to the EU, and they're trying to minimize the damage.
By invading a sovereign nation?

Consider the Russian position: the Ukraine has seen its government overthrown by an opposition movement deeply opposed to Russian influence. The legitimacy of their taking power has not been established, and rather than stabilise the country and set elections, they immediately started distancing themselves from Russia.

On top of that, the Ukraine is a key partner in the export of natural gas from Russia to Western Europe. Two of their major pipelines pass through the Ukraine, who are partners in the ownership and operation of them. On top of that, parts of southern Russia rely on the Ukrainian manufacturing sector; a lot of goods produced in eastern Ukraine are exported to Russia. A move away from Russia by the Ukrainians will hurt all of this, for both sides.

The Crimean Peninsula sits between the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. At the eastern end of the Sea of Azov is Rostov-on-Don, one of just four major ports within Russia. Of the other three, Murmansk is in the Arctic Circle, and is not good for trading. Vladivostok is just north of the Korean Peninsula, eleven time zones away. It mostly services eastern Russia. The other one is St. Petersberg, which is good. So with a major population concentration in the west of the country, the Russians need Rostov-on-Don (which also sits on the Don River, one of their major waterways), but if the Ukrainians distance themselves from Russia, trading through Rostov-on-Don will become difficult. They will also lose access to the Ukrainian port of Odessa.

Crimea is also home to the Black Sea Fleet, one of the major fleets of the Russian Navy. Losing access to Crimea would mean the Russian military presence in the area would be significantly reduced.

Finally, one of the key issues in the protest movement was the choice between aligning with the EU, or closer ties with Russia. Those in favour of joining the EU felt that a relationship with Russia would hurt them economically. Likewise, those in favour of getting closer to Russia felt that moving to the EU would hurt them. The new government in Kiev made their intentions fairly well known, and a lot of ethnic Russians felt that their fears were being realised and that the new government was marginalising them.

Given that there us so much economic, socio-political and military future at stake, Russia is pretty much forced to have a position on what is happening in the Ukraine. How they choose to act on that position is open to debate, but the events in the Ukraine have had significant consequences for Russia. After all, less than two weeks ago, the world was singing their praises for Russia after the Olympics. Putin has already burnt up all of that goodwill in less than twenty-four hours, which is not something than you would do on a whim. Why risk international condemnation like that unless there was something serious at stake? In the worst-case scenario for Russia, the government in Kiev could completely cut ties with Moscow, and Russia loses its ability to import goods through the Black Sea and export gas to Europe. Given that they just spent $51 billion on the Olympics, Russia could be staring down the barrel of a major recession. After all, one of the reasons why Greece went into an economic crisis was because they could not afford to pay their debts over the 2004 Olympics.
 
And, I don't care how unlikely it is, any chance at all is too much. It happened twice, in Japan.
Atomic/nuclear bombs just aren't right. I'm more saying that I'm shocked to find out that the WMDs still exist (outside of North Korean fireworks), rather than I'm saying that it's likely anything will happen.

You are comparing the largest conflict in the history of mankind to diplomatic tensions over a small part of the Ukraine and ports in the Black Sea, with no shots yet fired. Relax. Nobody is going to end humanity over the Crimean peninsula.

Use Google. "Does russia still have nukes." Easy.
 
That's all I was saying - "I'm surprised that RF still has nuclear weapons." I'm not saying, anywhere, that it's likely that they'll use it. I've been taught, however, to put your trust in people with powerful weapons/machinery etc., and don't like seeing politicians (whom I don't always trust) playing with exceedingly powerful weapons.



On-topic once more, I had no idea of the importance of Rostov-on-Don, @prisonermonkeys, thanks for explaining that.
 
I had no idea of the importance of Rostov-on-Don, @prisonermonkeys, thanks for explaining that.
Which is the point - there is more to this than one country invading another to claim land or resources or to prove their might. But you will notice that a lot of Western media outlets are only reporting things in the simplest way possible.

I am not trying to justify one country invading another, mind you. I am simply pointing out that Vladimir Putin did not just wake up one day and invade the Ukraine for the lulz. He obviously has his reasons, and he is willing to endure international condemnation over it.

Nor am I trying to blame the victim here, but I think the new government made a huge mistake. They got rid of Yanukovych, which is fair enough, but that did not suddenly repair the country. This was never a case of the people wanting one thing and the President doing the opposite; when Yanukovych chose Russia over the EU, he had his supporters. And those supporters opposed the new government just as much as those in favour of EU integration opposed Yanukovych. The new government probably should have stabilised the country and waited for the elections before they started introducing policies that distanced the Ukraine from Russia, if only because the EU probably wouldn't accept the Ukraine to their ranks until everything had settled down.
 
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/03/03/08/02/govt-demands-answers-from-russian-envoy

Australia has told Russia it is deeply concerned by increasing tensions in Ukraine but Vladimir Putin's man in Canberra denies his country is staging an invasion.

Can someone tell Russia that when you enter a country with your military when they don't want you in the country that is classed as invading
As I told before, the invasion is not yet official. Those "gentlemen" carrying AK-74M's are called "Crimean self-defense militia" and the Russian gov-t "has nothing to do with it."
 
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/03/03/08/02/govt-demands-answers-from-russian-envoy

Australia has told Russia it is deeply concerned by increasing tensions in Ukraine but Vladimir Putin's man in Canberra denies his country is staging an invasion.

Can someone tell Russia that when you enter a country with your military when they don't want you in the country that is classed as invading

That's the difficult part; Russia are already established guests in the Ukraine, their interest in the region is based on historic ownership; Ukraine is the birthplace of the Russian state. They will use whatever treaties necessary to maintain their presence there.

To complicate things; if you support the "Kiev" government (generalising) then it's likely that you take a less pro-Russian stance. If you're Crimean it's much more likely... but in both cases you're two different representatives of Ukraine, but in one case you're much more likely to want you there. Don't think that everyone is hostile to the presence of the Russisans, although it's likely that many of them are hostile to the possibility of war, social division or the inevitable financial problems that the Rouble's crash is potentially going to cause businesses with strong Russian links.

Note that no world power has asked Russia to withdraw from Ukraine, only to repair to its bases therewithin.
 
Can someone tell Russia that when you enter a country with your military when they don't want you in the country that is classed as invading
The Russians have always been in Crimea - it's home to one of their biggest naval bases.
 
But it's arranged that the Russian navy stays in Sevastopol until 2042. So this is not the case when "they don't want".

Possible a mistranslation between the two of you...particularly in "to want"?

I think @prisonermonkeys was pointing out that saying "they don't want you in that country" as @Grayfox did isn't quite right. Russia were always a large part of Ukraine's history. They have a mandate to be there, a treaty to be there, and the agreement of the current parliament to be there.

No one, including the Ukraini governement, have asked Russia to leave the Ukraine. That doesn't mean they all want Russia there but it isn't right to say no Ukraini want them there.

One problem is that the Australian prime minister is making statements as if this was an invasion...he's already making news around the world for his statements in respect of this, he either has incompetent ratters or he himself is politically imcompetent. Sadly that means that the Australian press (in part) also think that this is some kind of invasion thereby ignoring the fact that this is something a little more complex.

Beeb - What Next in Ukraine? - Interesting broad-brush analysis of some of the history and current drivers.

Beeb - Russia in de facto Control of Crimea
 
Informational warfare.
image.jpg
image.jpg

GM-94 grenade launchers.Where'd these "rebels" get them in Ukraine? The left one even has a holographic sight. Also note the very left guy carrying a "black Kalashnikov" - the AK-74M. It's not exclusive but not used anywhere in Ukraine, too.

I have watched this video, but now it's deleted from YouTube. Assholes.
 
Last edited:
@Rage Racer ; please remove the corpse picture... if indeed that's what it shows. Certainly the caption describes it as such. Whatever side that's still just someone like us.

As to the rest; Russian TV has already announced the winner, so that's good :)
 
The Russians have always been in Crimea - it's home to one of their biggest naval bases.
It's one thing to "be" and completely another thing to block and takeover Ukrainian army bases in Crimea. I would post some youtube vids here, but they're in Russian, so there's no point really.

@Rage Racer ; please remove the corpse picture... if indeed that's what it shows. Certainly the caption describes it as such. Whatever side that's still just someone like us.
The point is that it's not a corpse, and those dudes are actors, which is quite clearly visible both on that pic and the ones above.
 
It's one thing to "be" and completely another thing to block and takeover Ukrainian army bases in Crimea. I would post some youtube vids here, but they're in Russian, so there's no point really.

I saw footage of them "blocking" Ukrainian bases in, effectively preventing the occupants from emerging. Have the Russians actually overtaken any Ukrainian bases at this time, or just blockaded them?
 
It's one thing to "be" and completely another thing to block and takeover Ukrainian army bases in Crimea. I would post some youtube vids here, but they're in Russian, so there's no point really

Blocking military bases means you are planning to invade and want to prevent the counties army from stopping you.
Basic rule of invading a country, take over or prevent the local army from responding and it will be much easier for you
 
Back